These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26053843)

  • 1. 'Clustering' documents automatically to support scoping reviews of research: a case study.
    Stansfield C; Thomas J; Kavanagh J
    Res Synth Methods; 2013 Sep; 4(3):230-41. PubMed ID: 26053843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Multi-focus cluster labeling.
    Eikvil L; Jenssen TK; Holden M
    J Biomed Inform; 2015 Jun; 55():116-23. PubMed ID: 25869415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Pinpointing needles in giant haystacks: use of text mining to reduce impractical screening workload in extremely large scoping reviews.
    Shemilt I; Simon A; Hollands GJ; Marteau TM; Ogilvie D; O'Mara-Eves A; Kelly MP; Thomas J
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Mar; 5(1):31-49. PubMed ID: 26054024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A systematic method for search term selection in systematic reviews.
    Thompson J; Davis J; Mazerolle L
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Jun; 5(2):87-97. PubMed ID: 26052649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An Automated Literature Review Tool (LiteRev) for Streamlining and Accelerating Research Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning: Descriptive Performance Evaluation Study.
    Orel E; Ciglenecki I; Thiabaud A; Temerev A; Calmy A; Keiser O; Merzouki A
    J Med Internet Res; 2023 Sep; 25():e39736. PubMed ID: 37713261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Machine learning in systematic reviews: Comparing automated text clustering with Lingo3G and human researcher categorization in a rapid review.
    Muller AE; Ames HMR; Jardim PSJ; Rose CJ
    Res Synth Methods; 2022 Mar; 13(2):229-241. PubMed ID: 34919321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits.
    Mahood Q; Van Eerd D; Irvin E
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Sep; 5(3):221-34. PubMed ID: 26052848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Text mining to support abstract screening for knowledge syntheses: a semi-automated workflow.
    Pham B; Jovanovic J; Bagheri E; Antony J; Ashoor H; Nguyen TT; Rios P; Robson R; Thomas SM; Watt J; Straus SE; Tricco AC
    Syst Rev; 2021 May; 10(1):156. PubMed ID: 34039433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Building a common pipeline for rule-based document classification.
    Patterson OV; Ginter T; DuVall SL
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2013; 192():1211. PubMed ID: 23920985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Automated Classification of Selected Data Elements from Free-text Diagnostic Reports for Clinical Research.
    Löpprich M; Krauss F; Ganzinger M; Senghas K; Riezler S; Knaup P
    Methods Inf Med; 2016 Aug; 55(4):373-80. PubMed ID: 27406024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Enhanced information retrieval from narrative German-language clinical text documents using automated document classification.
    Spat S; Cadonna B; Rakovac I; Gütl C; Leitner H; Stark G; Beck P
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2008; 136():473-8. PubMed ID: 18487776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Techniques for identifying cross-disciplinary and 'hard-to-detect' evidence for systematic review.
    O'Mara-Eves A; Brunton G; McDaid D; Kavanagh J; Oliver S; Thomas J
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Mar; 5(1):50-9. PubMed ID: 26054025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Search wide, dig deep: literature searching for qualitative research. An analysis of the publication formats and information sources used for four systematic reviews in public health.
    Stansfield C; Brunton G; Rees R
    Res Synth Methods; 2014 Jun; 5(2):142-51. PubMed ID: 26052653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Facilitating Full-text Access to Biomedical Literature Using Open Access Resources.
    Kang H; Hou Z; Li J
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2015; 216():1123. PubMed ID: 26262422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Text classification performance: is the sample size the only factor to be considered?
    Figueroa RL; Zeng-Treitler Q
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2013; 192():1193. PubMed ID: 23920967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Exploring supervised and unsupervised methods to detect topics in biomedical text.
    Lee M; Wang W; Yu H
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2006 Mar; 7():140. PubMed ID: 16539745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews.
    Peters MD; Godfrey CM; Khalil H; McInerney P; Parker D; Soares CB
    Int J Evid Based Healthc; 2015 Sep; 13(3):141-6. PubMed ID: 26134548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fast Model Adaptation for Automated Section Classification in Electronic Medical Records.
    Ni J; Delaney B; Florian R
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2015; 216():35-9. PubMed ID: 26262005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Development and evaluation of RapTAT: a machine learning system for concept mapping of phrases from medical narratives.
    Gobbel GT; Reeves R; Jayaramaraja S; Giuse D; Speroff T; Brown SH; Elkin PL; Matheny ME
    J Biomed Inform; 2014 Apr; 48():54-65. PubMed ID: 24316051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Searches for randomized controlled trials of drugs in MEDLINE and EMBASE using only generic drug names compared with searches applied in current practice in systematic reviews.
    Waffenschmidt S; Guddat C
    Res Synth Methods; 2015 Jun; 6(2):188-94. PubMed ID: 26099486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.